Skip to main content

Maybe I'm missing something, but every time I hear team Red complaining about a return to pre-Bush income tax levels on "job creators", I find myself thinking about two questions.  

The first, more often than not, is wondering how many people making more than $250k in a year actually run small businesses or objectively contribute to the number of people with jobs (excluding themselves, of course....)  

The second question basically cuts to what I think is the core of the issue:  Why is this  an either/or situation?  I don't buy that team Red are at all honest in how they present their concerns, but I wonder why team Blue (and especially the bluest of team Blue) doesn't call team Red out by presenting an option that would reward true "job creators" while simultaneously making non-job-creating high-income individuals pay a fair share of taxes.

For explanation, I'm a scientist in a field where being able to measure things accurately and objectively matters--measuring levels of radiation exposure, detecting chemicals in air or water, identifying cancer cells, etc., etc., etc.

By my perhaps naive thinking, I imagine that there should be a way to quantify job creation and reward an individual or company appropriately.  As a first pass, I wonder why team Blue doesn't propose a tax credit for every part-time or full-time job created over the course of a year.  In its simplest form, this could be based on a simple measure of X employees times Y hours per employee times Z dollars per hour in pre-tax or post-tax employee income.  

A slightly refined version of this model would include an extra factor "A" that would mean a job creator gets a tax credit for 90%, 80%, etc. of new employee income they generated.  Further refinement could institute a minimum employment duration, extra factors giving extra credit for hiring long-term unemployed, etc., etc., etc.

Now, I'm not fool enough to imagine that this sort of bill would make it to the President's desk with the House controlled by team Red and the Senate blocked by team Red filibusters.  Even so, my personal feeling is that team Blue could cut team Red off at their knees by making something like this a key point during campaigning--get out there with a united front, explain that "we're cutting taxes for 95+% of you while rewarding people who create new jobs for everyone", and watch team Red squirm.

Thoughts?

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (4+ / 0-)

    You think it's hot? Imagine what it would be like if global warming really existed!

    by JSc on Wed Aug 01, 2012 at 09:34:35 PM PDT

  •  I too am a scientist (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    this just in

    and your plan is far, far too logical to have a chance

    Of course we could jigger the tax code to encourage job growth. We jigger it all the time - to encourage people to buy houses, save for retirement etc

    The means are there, the congressional will is not....

    People have no fucking idea what their cat is thinking, but they're sure they have a God all figured out. — @Wolfrum via web

    by IgnoreAtYourPeril on Wed Aug 01, 2012 at 10:33:14 PM PDT

    •  What my cat is not a God? (0+ / 0-)

      She thinks she is, at least in this house.

      Conservatives supported slavery, opposed women’s suffrage, supported Jim Crow, opposed the 40-hour work week, the abolishment of child labor, and supported McCarthyism. from 'It's The Conservatism, Stupid' by Paul Waldman July 12, 2006

      by arealniceguy on Thu Aug 02, 2012 at 12:05:31 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  did you miss the plan Team O put forth? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    IgnoreAtYourPeril

    reward companies that brought jobs home
    raised taxes on those that didn't
    boy that sure got a lot of votes in the house...

  •  As long as rethugs have any control in congress (0+ / 0-)

    There will be no important legislation unless massive public opinion is against them and then only if their moneybags paymasters get the legislation tricked out so it has so many loopholes in it a MACK truck could go thru sideways.

    Conservatives supported slavery, opposed women’s suffrage, supported Jim Crow, opposed the 40-hour work week, the abolishment of child labor, and supported McCarthyism. from 'It's The Conservatism, Stupid' by Paul Waldman July 12, 2006

    by arealniceguy on Thu Aug 02, 2012 at 12:10:19 AM PDT

  •  Conservatives are re-enacters. (0+ / 0-)

    Their job creators are re-enacting, pronouncing "let their be jobs," much as the original Creator said "let there be light."

    Yes, I know that sounds just too hubristic, but never under-estimate a man's fascination with his own mind.

    If God is willing, it will happen. That's what the adherents of Islam believe, as well. Which probably accounts for much fundamentalist agitation. Jealousy of the brother.

    Islam is, like Potestantism, supposed to be an improvement over Christianity, a corrective.  

    Willard's forte = "catch 'n' cage". He's not into "catch and release."

    by hannah on Thu Aug 02, 2012 at 03:44:01 AM PDT

  •  excellent thinking, but beware (0+ / 0-)

    I've been seething for months over this Red-Team use of the term "job creator" without any criterion for measuring job creation.  They appear to be winning this word-misuse battle in a walkaway.  

    As you think about a model for changing policy, though, could I suggest a couple of things?

    (1) Clearly separate the discussion of selecting appropriate measurement of job creation from implementation of policy/incentive measures.  I suggest this merely to avoid the common conference-room chaos caused by everyone yammering about different parts of the process at once.

    (2) Beware carrying connotations of "measurement" and "model" from the physical sciences into a domain where game theory governs.  As soon as you devise measurement and incentive mechanisms, your "system under study" will begin to game both of them as hard as it can to extract money from "model" without providing the benefit you desire.  

    Thanks for caring enough to write this up.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site